From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 03:30:20 +0800
To: frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Subject: Re: Java
In-Reply-To: <199606040626.XAA09729@netcom7.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199606041306.JAA08943@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Bill Frantz writes:
> At 10:22 PM 6/3/96 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> >I've been rather hard on Java here lately.
> 
> I'll say.  You have also ignored some of Java's other features.  Machine
> independence is probably the most important.

Many languages are machine independent. Thats hardly a new feature.

> A nice, small, easy to learn language is another.

Scheme, anyone?

However, your point is taken. Java is a neat little language in many
ways. However, that isn't cause enough for literally fifty books on
the subject to be on display, including breathless ones proclaiming
"Tips from experienced Java programmers!" as if there are any in the
world at this point. There are dozens of cute little languages in the
world -- scheme, smalltalk, etc, etc.

I mean, with all the "Teach yourself Java in 21 days" and company
books coming out, you would think you were dealing witht he major
application programming language for the world instead of something
that at the moment is used for almost nothing more interesting than
fake scrolling LED sign applets.

> If you want defense in depth, run your Java interpreter in an OS
> environment which limits the interpreter's access to only those resources
> you wish it to access.

Since that doesn't exist, it isn't an option for my users. It is not,
in any case, my obligation to make Java secure. I'm not the one hyping
it.

> >Beyond that, however, they have created the ultimate hype
> >monster. Java is a neat idea looking for a good application. I use the
> >web all day long and I have yet to see a good use for Java.
> 
> There have been discussions of crypto applications in Java.

Useless, almost, for a web environment.

If you want to really put Crypto in netscape, the plugin facilities
and a good C compiler are a better tool, and C is 99% portable.

> While, as a number of us have pointed out, there are problems
> doing crypto with Java, it may be the easiest way to deliver strong crypto
> quickly to Joe Websurfer.

You could hand any websurfer a Netscape PGP plugin without much work
at all, and you could easily build it on lots of platforms. After all,
look at how many platforms that lowly C code like PGP runs on.

Perry